New Delhi: India’s food safety regulator has told the Supreme Court it wants mandatory warning labels on the front of packaged food and drink cartons, marking a sharp reversal from its earlier stance that matching global labelling norms was too difficult.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has proposed a red hexagonal warning mark for products found to be high in two or more of three nutrients, saturated fat, sugar and salt, according to a court filing seen by news agency Reuters.
The document has not been made public.
What the label will say
Under the proposal, packs would carry declarations such as “HIGH FAT,” “HIGH SUGAR,” “HIGH SALT” or “HIGHLY SWEETENED BEVERAGE” so that consumers can readily identify products high in those nutrients, the filing said, adding that the system is meant to help people make informed choices, particularly where children and other vulnerable groups are concerned.
FSSAI has said the rollout will happen in phases to give manufacturers time to adjust and that single-ingredient products will be left out.
At present, Indian rules require only an ingredients list and basic nutritional information printed on the back of a pack.
A reversal under public pressure
The shift comes days after the government had shelved an earlier labelling proposal following private objections from food companies, which triggered a wave of criticism online from consumers and health experts. Several of the same companies, including Coca-Cola and Nestle, have voluntarily carried similar warnings in European markets for years.
At a meeting on March 19, industry executives had argued that warning labels confuse shoppers and achieve little, pressing instead for a focus on portion control, according to recordings reported by Reuters earlier. Coca-Cola India executive Mili Bhattacharya was quoted as calling it “very simplistic” to assume that a consumer who does not read ingredient lists would meaningfully change their diet on seeing a symbol on a pack, arguing that Indian doctors had already done well in advising patients on what to avoid.
The FSSAI subsequently told the Supreme Court in August that it was “difficult” for India to align with international labelling standards, echoing the industry’s position.
SC pushed for faster action
The regulator’s climbdown follows sharp remarks from the Supreme Court, which was hearing petitions from health campaigners over the long-delayed labels and told the government this month to move quickly, observing that “the world should know that India is very much concerned about the overall health of its citizens” while pointing to India’s rising obesity burden.
The top court had earlier suggested India could look at the Israeli model, where a red warning appears if even one of the three nutrients is high. The FSSAI’s proposal sets a higher threshold, requiring two.
Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, lead counsel for the non-profit 3S And Our Health, which had taken the government to court over the absence of warning labels, told Reuters that the organisation was studying the proposal and that its experts would review it.
The labelling question carries weight in a packaged food market worth over USD 100 billion. A study published in The Lancet has projected that around 450 million Indians could be obese or overweight by 2050.
| | 
